Posted Friday 18th July 2008 12:41 GMT
I would recomend for everyone to read the book "Inside Intel".
Due to the demand for "second sourcing" in the USA Intel had to support the birth of AMD.
Since then it as been a continous litigation (and foul play) between them.
As a consumer I think we have to be very gratefull towards AMD and hope it will stay alive.
On the other hand Intel is a similar cathastrofy for IT like Microsoft both having taken the easy and dirty road from the beginning.
Posted Friday 18th July 2008 13:50 GMT
Surely it's either "We neva dan naafing, innit?" or "We've not done anything." ? Landing somewhere in between just makes you sound silly.
Unlike me, I obviously sound perfectly reasonable at all times.
Posted Saturday 19th July 2008 09:35 GMT
Their desktop/laptop offerings haven't up to par even since Intel launched the Core Duo processor, and Barcelona didn't work the way they planned...
Plus, they're horrible at marketing compared to Intel. And they made an overpriced acquisition of ATi.
AMD just needs itself and some time to bring itself down.
Posted Monday 21st July 2008 12:41 GMT
Not very often I comment, but the last post by Laxman needs answering -
1. If the Core2 Duo chips by Intel are all they are made out to be, how come the cores can't talk to each other? Those made by AMD can.
2. If the allegations the EC is examining against Intel are true, Intel deserve all they get for dirty tricks and restricting the market for processors in their favour.
3. If AMD are SO bad, how come thay have contracts in their pockets from firms like dell for the new Phenom processors? And also that their opteron server processors seem to be far more in demand than any similar processor offered by Intel?
4. Ref the ATI aquisition, have you read the reviews for the new ATI HD 4850 card, and its new big brothers that will be on sale soon?
5. Intel encourage customer ignorance about their products through the way they label them. AMD clearly differentiate between X2/X3/X4 chips, as well as the X£ and X$'s being marketed under the Phenom brand. Intel is nowhere near as clear in its labelling. Not only do we have Core Duo and then Core 2 duo, we now have Core 2 Quad - why not just Core Quad, as non tech users loking at the current name would be hard=pressed to work out if they were getting an x2, x4 or x8 chip?
I rest my case
Back to the article